Should Gun Makers Be Accountable For Deaths Caused By Their Products?

COMMENTARY/FORUM

A potentially historic lawsuit is pending in federal court in New York.

Victims of gun violence are contending in Hamilton vs. Accu-tek that handgun manufacturers should be held accountable for the deaths and injuries that result from their products.

In the past, consumers have won judgments against manufacturers who designed or manufactured defective guns that caused injuries.

This case seeks to break new ground by holding the gun industry liable for negligence in the way it distributes and markets its product. It targets all U.S. handgun manufacturers and charges that they negligently oversupply the market for handguns and fail to take reasonable precautions to ensure that their products end up in the hands of legal buyers -- not kids or criminals.

Gun manufacturers and their trade association have denounced the Accu-tek case, vociferously arguing that guns are a legal product.

At first blush, such objections might seem reasonable. Upon closer examination, however, a compelling argument emerges to let the plaintiffs have their day in court. The judge has rejected the gun industry's initial attempts to have the case dismissed, and a jury will begin hearing evidence this fall.

Firearm manufacturers have two good reasons to fear the Accu-Tek case.

First, of course, they may be forced to pay millions of dollars in compensation to victims of gun violence. Even more serious, however, is the threat that the gun industry's dirty little secrets will be exposed.

Just as litigation over the health risks of tobacco uncovered the cigarette companies' tactics to addict smokers and lure children, the Accu-tek litigation will likely lay bare the details of gun companies methods. To date, the operations of the firearms industry have been shrouded in secrecy. Hamilton vs. Accu-tek threatens to lift that veil -- and the public surely won't like what it sees.

Today, America's gun industry is exempt from federal health and safety laws. Virtually every other consumer product sold in our country -- from teddy bears to jumbo jets -- must meet stringent requirements, overseen by federal regulatory agencies.

This lack of safety regulation takes a heavy toll. Guns kill nearly twice as many Americans as all other household and recreational products combined. A 1994 study by the Centers for Disease Control estimated that by 2003, the number of firearm deaths nationwide will exceed the number of automobile casualties.

The absence of regulation also places a heavy responsibility on the civil justice system. Citizen lawsuits are the sole means available to hold the gun industry accountable when its products cause death and injury. In essence, litigation functions as the only "regulation" of the gun industry.

Thus far, firearms manufacturers have eluded responsibility for their products by maintaining this unique exemption from regulation. Congress, in thrall to the gun lobby, shows no sign of applying the same standards to guns that other products must meet.

For now, the civil justice system and cases such as Hamilton vs. Accu-Tek are the only way to unmask an industry that profits from one of America's most deadly consumer products -- and force it to begin paying off its accumulated debt of death and injury.

M. Kristen Rand is the director of federal policy for the Violence Policy Center, a nonprofit organization founded in 1988 to promote public support for rational gun control policies. Readers may write her at VPC, 1350 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 825, Washington, DC 20036.